Preconceptional Screening of Couples for Carriers of Cystic Fibrosis: A Prospective Evaluation of Effects, Costs and Savings for Different Mutation Detection Methods

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to perform a prospective evaluation of the effects, costs and savings of a preconceptional screening programme of couples for carriers of cystic fibrosis (CF). Methods: A decision model for both single-entry two-step (SETS) and double-entry two-step (DETS) couple screening was constructed. Two mutation detection methods were considered: allele-specific oligonucleotide (ASO) hybridisation screening of 32 mutations, with a sensitivity of 90%, and denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE), with a sensitivity of 98%. In our model, the following combinations were used: (1) ASO for both steps; (2) DGGE for both steps, and (3) ASO for the first step and DGGE for the second step. The model is demonstrated using figures from the Netherlands, where there is a carrier frequency of 1:30. We estimated the value of different choices and probabilities in a decision tree and determined the costs of screening for CF and the costs of the illness itself. Results: We found that with most of the combinations of mutation detection methods, SETS couple screening could offer positive net savings in the Netherlands. The ASO/DGGE combination resulted in the highest net savings. DETS couple screening for all combinations, including testing with DGGE in both steps, did not show a positive cost-savings balance at all, not even with an uptake rate of 100%. The maximum number of carrier couples identified when screening 100,000 couples with the ASO/DGGE combination was 98 (SETS). This could result in about 25 fewer children born with CF each year in the Netherlands, under the following assumptions: (1) each couple has two children and 10% of couples are unable to have children; (2) of detected carrier couples, 15% decide not to have children and 85% make use of prenatal diagnosis; (3) of those fetuses diagnosed with CF, 80% are aborted, and (4) prenatal diagnosis carries a 0.75% risk of iatrogenic abortion. Conclusions: The results of this evaluation show that there are no financial objections to the preconceptional screening of couples in the Netherlands when the above-mentioned assumptions apply; thus, further evaluation can concentrate on the balance of the non-economic consequences of screening for participants and for society.